This is a rebuttal to various posts on various threads from various G-Shockers attempting to dismiss the GW9100-1 as "Not A Real Gulfman."
First, it's not a democracy. If Casio says that the GW9100-1 is a Gulfman, then it is a Gulfman. Period.
Second, arguing that the atomic Gulfman is not a "real" Gulfman because it doesn't have a tide graph is like arguing that Christian Bale is not a "real" Batman because Bale doesn't wear tights and doesn't drive a long convertible with big fins.
Third, a tide graph would completely destroy the appearance of the atomic Gulfman. Not all change is good, but some change is good. Adios, tide graph.
Fourth, the entire discussion is a red herring. The atomic Gulfman is the perfect G-Shock for a certain segment of G-Shockers, and this "real or not" debate is a distraction from that more fundamental observation. There is a segment of G-Shockers that want simplicity, not complexity. The atomic Gulfman is brilliant with the basics: precise accuracy due to atomic timekeeping, rugged durability due to deeply recessed face/titanium parts and dependable reliability due to solar power. The atomic Gulfman has everything I need...and nothing I don't.
Most importantly, the atomic Gulfman has one of the coolest visual designs in the history of G-Shocks. Each "master" has a different logo on its caseback, and the specific logo for the atomic Gulfman is a turtle. The turtle is an animal of timeless and cross-cultural symbolism throughout literary history and cinematic history. If you look at the atomic Gulfman, you can see the "turtle shell" inspiration in the design of the watch. Can the same be said for the Riseman? Or the Mudman? Or the Frogman?
Creating a striking diametrically-opposed symbolic contrast is the reception gauge of the atomic Gulfman. The inspiration for the reception gauge is a revolver.
Why would the designers of the atomic Gulfman intentionally pair the symbolism of a turtle with the symbolism of a revolver?